Poetry and Other Stuff

So, I'm still reading Narnia -- the reason I didn't post Monday. But I'm back now. =D

I don't have too much to say. I've got links to my pinterest and tumblr and twitter -- I happen to repin or reblog a lot of cats, flowers, random-fandom stuffs, and whatever I think is funny. I can have a weird, nerdy sense of humor.

I might eventually begin posting arguments on here. Argumentative essays. I'm taking AP language, and I need to know things like how to construct and deconstruct an argument. So, I'll need practice; and y'all will be my guinea pig audience. (Hopefully you're not actual guinea pigs behind the screen. I kinda imagine this rodent army of guinea pigs staring at the screen, eating my words up. It's kind of a creepy mental image.) Don't worry, I'll steer clear of sensitive topics, or political topics or disturbing social norms or whatever you feel like calling them.

But other than that, there's not much to say. so I wrote some poems the other day, and I decided to share one with you. Don't know why.

Inky Starlight

On a clear night,
When the stars glisten like
Drops of white ink
On black paper;
I go outside,
Sit in my backyard,
Staring up at the brilliant mystery.
And I take my glasses off,
To see the moon properly,
Big and fuzzy:
The friendly moon of my childhood.


(Do they even make white ink?) This is not my favorite work. But it is my work, so I love it. (Wow, I think I just paralleled Stephen Crane there, with his poem on the creature who ate his heart.)

Anyways, I don't... really have anything else to say. Just wanted to let you know I'm not dead. I'm still coming up with writing stuffs. And, have a blessed Wednesday!

On Quotes and Music

Today, I was looking through Tumblr and found this quote:

This picture was made by me in paint. I copied the quote from tumblr.

This kind of reminds me of What Faith Can Do by Kutless. and The Lost Get Found by Britt Nicole. Both lovely songs.

I don't really know the point of this post. I think it was to say sorry for not posting a book review on Monday. But I found this quote instead. You're welcome.

Have a blessed day!

On Poetry

I have nothing planned. So I wrote a poem for you:

 

Thy Infinity

 

Indigo swirls

I cannot see the end

Or is it the bottom?

Everywhere the same

Underneath me, above, around

But at least it is

A fascinating color.

 

 

Poetry is not my strong point. I'm still doing nanowrimo, so don't judge me too harshly. (I haven't dropped out yet! I am so proud. I dropped out long before this last year.) I'm up to 35,000 words, despite the homework piling up around my ears.

 

Not to mention my cat's kittens (they are about four or five weeks old now) are starting to climb out of their box. There are three of them, but only two are climbing around, squealing and distracting me from writing. The third is a runt, who I have to feed replacement milk every other hour: he is so adorable. I named him Woodstock (after the little yellow bird from Charlie Brown) and I feed him every other hour. (Or so.)

 

Nothing else to say, really. I started reading The Book Thief (Markus Zusak). I may or may not have a review for that on Monday. Other than that... have a blessed day. (And a blessed Thursday, since I don't post on Thursdays.)

 

:D

Follow Friday #23

Follow Friday is hosted by Alison Can Read and Parajunkee.

Q: Do you mind books with similar ideas to other books? Similar concepts, backgrounds, retellings, or pulled-to-publish fanfic?

Honestly? I don't mind them too much, if they're original enough. I mean, there's a fine line to walk between similar-but-unique and this-looks-like-plagiarism. I mean, even at sixteen, I've read enough books to know that there are a lot of similarities between books, and that those similarities don't somehow make those books inferior.

Now it's just my opinion, but books are actually better when they draw off of preexisting ideas. I mean, cookies come in all types - chocolate chip, peanut butter, sugar. But if your "cookies" consisted of frozen ketchup and raisins in a bowl, can you really consider them cookies anymore? Same with books. You want to deviate from the normal as much as possible, but if you go too far, then it'll be incomprehensible.

Whether you think so or not, books are all similar to each other. They are all stories comprised of words. They all tell something that is happening (or has happened). They are all beautiful, no matter how much you dislike this one or loathe that one. They all have characters, a setting, they are time and place and look-at-what-is-happening.

So, really, books are similar and books are unique at the same time. That's what makes them so special - you can tell the same plot a thousand times, but if you put a unique spin on it each time, then they'll all be loved.

Not that you can confuse this with plagiarism. Or cliche-ness. Those are copying; copying is for the writers with little skill of their own. None of that "oh, I'll change Character A's name and rename Quiditch and take out the wizard's robes." If you did all that and then added fairies with the ability to blow your Mogwarts to smithereens, and then told us this was all located in the magical kingdom of Hessia, then you might have something.

But do you understand my point? I know that rambled a bit. I can't help it. But similarity in books should be celebrated just as much as uniqueness. They both need to be equally present in a book, or at least present, so that the book can be recognized as a book and not some... I don't know... nymph in disguise. Or perhaps a nymph's corpse; they live in those trees, people!

Anyways, I'm stopping here before this turns into a rant about dead nymphs and frozen ketchup.
What do you think? Are similarities really that bad? Have a blessed weekend! 

On Writing Plays for Writing Exercises

So, this is a short post, because I am super-duper-extra-busy.

Why am I super-duper-extra-busy, you ask? Because my mother said if I get the laundry room sorted out (seriously, it looks like some sort of cloth bomb went off in there), if I take out the trash, do the dishes, and clean the litterboxes... THEN she'll take me to Barnes and Noble and buy me TWO BOOKS.

You know you're an avid reader when you're so psyched to get two books that you'll do that list of chores.

But this was not the point of my post. I meant to talk to you about plays. In my creative writing class today (I have it as a school elective, in-case-you-didn't-know), we're starting plays, to "branch out from regular fiction." That's not even something my teacher said. That's what I percieved from this particular class.

We're supposed to write a one-act play, on anything we so desire to write about. How does this relate to us novel-writers?

It turns out that writing a play is harder than it seems. Especially me, since I've read about one play in the entirity of my life: The Crucible.* There is generally no narrative, no pages-and-pages to spread your creative description and dialogue and character-building (oh my!). In this case, we have 20 pages of a one-act story to fill out. The. Entire. Story.

With plays, most of it is told through dialogue and those little italicized stage directions. The setting, the character-fleshing-out, the tension and conflict and whatever else you want to throw into the mix. This is a pretty excellent way to spread your creative roots.

Think of a tree - it needs to spread its roots over lots of area; in the same way, you need to spread your creativity over a lot of different types of literature. Including plays. And it is a decent way to develop the acquired skill of showing, not telling.

Those stage directions are a lot of work, but they show most of the tension. And not those crazy symbols you place in the setting ("the curtains are blue, indicating his sadness!"), but the actions of the characters. Frowning, leaning forward, that sort of thing.

It also has a small cast of characters. At least the one-act play does. This provides a chance to really know and develop small groups of people. Which is a helpful tool in any writer's toolbox, in my opinion.

Movies are kind of the same thing, but this one-act play doesn't switch scenes so often. In plays, you don't have months and a camera; people are performing it live. So you really need to make it all count.

So, instead of writing short stories or a short spiff for exercising your creative muscle, maybe try a one-act play. Who knows, it might help novel-writing more than you think.

How about you? What do you think of plays? Have a blessed Wednesday!


*I recommend reading the Crucible, if you never have. I thought that play was hilarious. They were all running around screaming, "WITCH!! :O" The paperwork I did on it for English class wasn't so funny, though.

Follow Friday #22

Follow Friday is a weekly meme hosted by Alison Can Read and Parajunkee.

Q: What is a deal breaker for you in a book? For example, do you abhor love triangles? Or can't deal with bad editing?

Yes, I abhor love triangles. Just choose one guy/girl and get it over with; please do not drag it out for an entire novel. Bad editing I can deal with, if the premise and plotline are good enough. For example, I read an entire series where there were mistakes on every page, because it was a solid world and awesome characters.

What really breaks the deal for me? Several things really, which you can't really blame me for (after all, there is simply not enough hours in the day to read everything). If you can't effectively introduce any likeable character within the first 10-50 pages, I will set it down. It doesn't even have to be the main character; it could be the MC's cousin's dog. Just, someone with at least a hint of depth.

Too much swearing or sex will put me off, as well. I know normal teenagers do that sort of stuff, but I don't, and I'd appreciate reading works as clean as me. Or at least not as dirty as "normal teenagers". If I wanted to relate to a normal teenager, then I wouldn't really be reading books and minding my language.

I also might put the book down if I don't like the voice. The style, or whatever you want to call it. That modern-teenager-girl voice you hear in a lot of novels can really pluck my last nerve. On the other hand, Medieval-Speak, and sometimes 1800s-Speak, confuses me, so a lot of older novels end up on the TBR pile as well.

If the book seems bland and cliche within the first 10-50 pages, I also set it down. I mean the starting out with her waking up, the over-descriptions on food, the slow pace, too much purple prose, the cliche archetype (like a nagging wife, a wise old man, a rebellious-just-to-be-rebellious teenager), etc. etc. etc.

So, yea. Love triangles, unrealistic characters, too much swearing/sex, unappealing voice, bland and cliche. I can't pick up every book; I can set standards for my reading selection.

[By the way, Nanowrimo has started! I'm up to 2,000 words. Just another 1500 or so today!]

How about you? What is a dealbreaker for you? Have a blessed weekend! 

One Girl's Trash Could Later Be Her Treasure

So, yesterday I cleaned my room. Well, "clean" is an overstatement. "Reorganized" is a better term for What I've Done.*

I have this drawer full of random junk that most people would have thrown out. I tend to keep the small stuff, and I'd set aside a drawer for it, but as I was cleaning yesterday, I found a new place to stick them all. This is a quick list of the more unusual stuff I found:

• 3 empty packets of Trident Layers gum (strawberry/citrus flavor).
• 2 hairbands, one purple and one black, that are as worn down as they can get without breaking.
• 3 plastic Barnes and Noble bags, the ones they hand you your books in. Nothing inside**
• 1 hem from a pair of old blue jeans: cut off when they'd dragged on the ground.
• 2 silky-type scraps of painted cloth: 1 lovely dark purple, 1 lightish blue with purple patches.
• 1 plastic, fake Roman coin. 2 dice, 1 blue and 1 white. 1 (funny-looking) red duct-tape flower.

The sort of junk you keep without anyone asking you to keep it is amazing, when you think of it. I have movie ticket stubs, every school binder I've used since freshman year (I'm a junior now)***, one of those plastic rings they sometimes put on cupcakes, as well as a metal tiger-head ring. I've even kept water bottles, soda cans, marbles, beads, and those paper wristbands they give you at concerts (Acquire the Fire, for me).

Trident Layers, a metal tiger-head ring, and my pitiful duct-tape flower.

How does this relate to writing? I think the point I'm trying to make is that even when you think it's junk, you should collect it. Past me didn't find this stuff practical in any way: I just kept it on a whim. But now, this random junk I've collected is priceless: they represent a memory of something, anything.

Every day is precious. Keeping the little things can help you remember them.

I think I'll label this is as inspiration. Delving through memories of happier or sadder times, turning over old objects and thinking of their past. I think it'd be kind of interesting to see what your characters keep as well. Do they collect old water bottles or movie ticket stubs or plastic bags?

Now, just as advice, I don't recommend you become a true hoarder. You'll have to throw away some things or get buried alive in your own trash. But keeping mementos, memories, little things can really delve deep to that soul you've buried under mounds of chocolate-bar wrappers.

What do you think? Keep the junk or hoard it? Have a blessed day!


*There's a song from Linkin Park called "What I've Done". I love that song. It has nothing to do with this post, just thought I'd mention.
**Well, technically, one of them had stuff inside. A Godiva chocolate bar wrapper and the cover of The Host by Stephanie Meyer. Sad, I know. I don't even like that book, nor did I buy that book from B&N - I bought it from Walmart.
***I used to have binders from middle school too, but I had to throw them away. My room is too tiny to keep them all.


  

the ARCs of Writing

*I have been planning to post this for weeks. My schedule's been busy like a bee. (Pardon the alliteration. Though I do love alliteration, like a little kid loves candy. Do you see what I did there? :D)

This is a short post, because this is an easy topic. In fact, I think I've blogged about this before, back in June. This time, I'm adding another element, because they spell a nifty little acronym: ARC.

Action --> Reaction --> Consequence.

An action is when your character does something.

A reaction is when something happens against/for your character and he/she does something against/for it.

A consequence is whatever happens as a result.

Pretty simple to remember? A - R - C - A - R - C...... three lovely words, applied over and over again. This is why I think of the concept of writing as a swinging pendulum, or maybe a dance: it's just one-two-three, one-two-three. It flows from one, to two, to three. This is the only way I come up with ideas and outlines, because it's so simple for me. For example:

Melody Anne went to the ball (action). The prince danced with her, and she threw up because she was so nervous (reaction). The prince left to dance with Cinderella instead (consequence). Melody Anne left the ball at midnight in shame (action). She witnessed Cinderella drop her shoe and picked it up (reaction). The prince thanked her with fifty gold coins and a pony for keeping Cinderella's shoe safe and he went off with it to find his true love (consequence).

That was easy to write and read. It flows from action to reaction to consequence, in chronological order, without any interruptions. You could argue that Melody Anne leaving the ball in shame is a reaction or a consequence of her nervous vomit all over the prince, but I list it as an action because no one is forcing her to leave. She does it because of her own self, her own shame.

Now, that was a pretty small example. It works with entire novels (or so I've read - my first-novel sloppy copy hasn't even reached the midway mark!). This ARC method is a pretty nifty trick if you like outlining, and if you're a pantser, it shouldn't be too hard to go back and incorporate it into something written (I'm not a pantser, so you might get mixed results on that).

This is my bad example:

Donni goes to find a lemonade (action). He stumbles across a little lemonade stand run by a couple of six-year-olds (action). They sneer at his drunken appearance (reaction). He flips their table over, outraged (reaction). But first he yells at them for awhile (reaction). The little girls start crying at the drunken rage (reaction). Donni walks away, forgetting the incident (action).

Despite the obvious atrocity of a drunken man being mean to six-year-olds, Donni has no consequences for his actions. He acts, they react, he reacts, they react, then he walks away and forgets the whole thing, which is an action.

Adding consequences is especially necessary when the actions are bad. It's expected in real life and in fiction that bad guys go to jail, or are punished in some way. We crave it. Our morals refuse to accept bad things going unpunished.

Action --> Reaction --> Consequence.

I didn't study (A); I panic at the sight of the test and randomly guess (R); I get a 70%, or a D, on that test (C).
(True story. American History is freakin' difficult, man.)

ARC means many things. It's Noah's boat; it's an Advanced Reader Copy; it's action/reaction/consequence. It's a good thing to remember ARCs when you're stuck.

Have a blessed week. :)